My "abstract" obviously is not a fake. Who would fake that? <G>
Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Igor PDML-StR <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Oops.. Sorry, by mistake, I posted it as a reply to a wrong thread. > > Igor > > > On Wed, 7 Feb 2018, Igor PDML-StR wrote: > > >> >> Finally, I've watched (most of) the video, and these "experts" are also >> full of ... smoke. >> >> One of the guys mentioned the issue noted by Mark (albeit not as clearly >> formulated as Mark's), - the clouds behind the moon. But it was >> practically dismissed by others. >> >> They were mumbling about the sunset, saying it would be possible to get >> this light and this color, and one guy bragged about making his living >> from the twilight photographs. - But until almost the end, nobody thought >> that it would be non-physical to have red sunset colors (backlit) next to >> the moon, that is opposite to the sun during the full (or almost full) moon. >> (Just in case it is not obvious: the moon is full when the sun, which is >> the source of the light is on the opposite site, i.e. behind you, as you >> are looking at the moon. And I haven't seen a sunset when the eastern >> portion of the sky is red like this.) >> >> What's funny is that I googled images for moon and sunset, - to see how >> my physics-based argument holds against photos. To my surprise, I've found >> some images where the moon is superimposed over the sunset (or sunrise) >> sky. And those are clearly fake. >> Here is just one example (referenced as a photo by Castillo, - >> the link to the original photo is dead): >> http://planetearthandhumanity.blogspot.com/2013/07/our-moon- >> at-sunset.html >> >> That's clearly a fake! >> >> While, it is beyond any doubt to me that the original photo in question >> could not be done in a single shot, - I was curious if the angular sizes >> (the size of the rock or tree vs. the size of the moon) are compatible to >> be in the same shot in general. I have a feeling, - they are not. >> (You'd have to be too far away from the rock and the tree to see them at >> this small angular size, - to be able to photograph them with this much of >> detail.) >> But I am too lazy to do a careful geometrical consideration at the moment. >> >> But I have a big physics(astronomy)-based concern about yet another Peter >> Lik's photo... -I 'll send a separate message about that. >> >> Igor >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, 4 Feb 2018, Igor PDML-StR wrote: >> >> >>> >>> Nothing to write home about. .. err. to PDML. ;) >>> >>> Here are some examples of what came out: >>> http://42graphy.org/misc/2018-01-31-eclipse/ >>> >>> >>> Igor >>> >>> >>> Daniel J. Matyola Fri, 02 Feb 2018 10:13:47 -0800 wrote: >>> >>> Did you get anything interesting? >>> >>> >> > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
